All of JanJoar's Comments + Replies

That is absolutely true, but it remains to be seen if those attempts will hold up in the long run. There is a big difference between American power being in decline (but still dominant) and the world being multipolar. I would say that currently the derivative is <0 but American power is still vastly greater than any other country.

Of course the Chinese nuclear arsenal is enough in absolute terms to destroy a large segment of the US population (and an even greater share of GDP) but I would not say the same in practice. Contrary to the US and Russia, China... (read more)

1Vecn@tHe0veRl0rd
I guess my point is that there are diminishing diplomatic/power rewards from increasing the number of nuclear weapons in your stockpile. While having nuclear capability is certainly important to be considered a superpower, the advantage the US gains over China by having a nuclear arsenal way bigger than the the Chinese one is, in my view, relatively small. China still has enough nuclear weapons to make launching missiles at it a really bad idea for a president of the US who wants to keep his job/his party's political power/his citizens safe (even including the possible incompetency of China's nuclear force - see this report). Also, having a no first use policy would matter more if China's leader was bound by his countries laws, which he is unfortunately not.

You are correct in that there is quite a lot of contention when it comes to the current structure of the international system. While the PRC undoubtedly has a lot of economic heft, the degree to which this actually impacts the "polarity" of the system is unclear. The USSR was not a great power merely because it had a lot of tanks; it was at least seen as a political hegemon that controlled critical territory that allowed it potential world domination. It also had a a foreign policy objective diametrically opposed to the US - leading non-US aligned states t... (read more)

3Vecn@tHe0veRl0rd
On the other hand, China is definitely trying to build those alliances and the global influence that you speak of. One example would be the belt and road initiative, by which China is pouring money into low-income countries in Asia and Africa. Also, China not having a nuclear arsenal as big or as advanced delivery systems for warheads is somewhat irrelevant, since it still has an arsenal that could destroy all of the major American population centers more than twice over.